From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 109564 invoked by alias); 25 May 2017 06:08:21 -0000 Mailing-List: contact libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-alpha-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 86574 invoked by uid 89); 25 May 2017 06:06:17 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=thursday X-HELO: homiemail-a92.g.dreamhost.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] Support dl-tunables.list in subdirectories To: "H.J. Lu" , GNU C Library References: <20170524194109.GA23029@lucon.org> From: Siddhesh Poyarekar Message-ID: <11468384-3c04-03a7-d6b4-7fb7e83f1714@gotplt.org> Date: Thu, 25 May 2017 06:08:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20170524194109.GA23029@lucon.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2017-05/txt/msg00749.txt.bz2 On Thursday 25 May 2017 01:11 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: > We can put processor specific tunables in dl-tunables.list under > sysdeps instead of in elf/dl-tunables.list. > > Any comments? That makes sense. However, please avoid putting processor/arch information in the tunable names. That is, instead of glibc.x86_tune or something like that, stick to glibc.tune[1]. That way if the tunable is deemed to be applicable to other architectures in future, then we can simply move it to the generic list. Siddhesh [1] Any processor/hardware feature tuning should go into the glibc.tune namespace. I see you're looking to implement IFUNC overrides, so the tunable I've proposed for that is glibc.tune.mcpu where the values should map to those in gcc.